My take has been that most of these trolls are plants by some other party to make Monero look bad. They are annoying to Monero supporters, too -- not just you.
We can only speculate. It is a fact that there have been a lot of absurd cheerleader-type pro-Monero posts going up recently that we have nothing to do with. Usually they display a poor grasp of English grammar which ought to be a clue who is behind them, but in all honesty we just don't know. There may also be negative posts going up talking down about other coins, something we generally don't do (unless we have specific substantive criticisms). Treat them with similar skepticism. |
|
|
|
Thanks but I'll pass. I haven't really followed Ethereum and I was
under impression they'd already begun fundraising.
Yes of course they have been fundraising. Specifically because they are doing an IPO (on a vaporware coin) and not a spin-off, which was pretty much the point of this thread to begin with. |
|
|
|
Note that if Ethereum had launched using the spin-off model, it would not be possible to potentially create a threatening clone. Why do you think they chose not to do this?
Erm. Maybe because the spin-off tech isn't really out there. Yet. That is most certainly not the reason since Ethereum won't be launching for several months anyway, and Stellar has already launched with a partial spin off. Try again. Furthermore spin-offs have already been done using different techniques. For example Memorycoin 2.0 spun off from Protoshares |
|
|
|
i donated another 100 XMR just now, put it on the board! Money successfully sent, transaction <6267d65e206c9ea952448fc334c6920af5f2bcdffedce6721b8b7702fbbc44a1> Thank you! |
|
|
|
|
I had a problem several months ago with BTER where a database error resulted i some of my coins being lost.
Despite emails to support (no reply), PM to freeworm (no reply), two native Chinese speakers trying to contact them on my behalf via phone and QQ (both unsuccessful), my coins remained missing for almost two months. Then eventually another native Chinese speaker tried to contact them on my behalf and was able to successfully get the coins returned.
Again, this was several months ago and their support may have improved since then. However, even with the issues I had it is true that I did get my coins back so it could have been worse.
|
|
|
|
Doge has more potential than Litecoin, because Doge has already hit the rock bottom and its inflation is slowing down, Litecoin has most downside risk, its inflation will be in double-digits for a few years.
No DOGE has more potential because it has something that is unique and difficult to replicate (a brand and community). That may not be much, but LTC has nothing at all. It is just BTC without the advantages of BTC. |
|
|
|
It took almost 2 years just to get to the 10,000 BTC = 1 pizza stage.
Bitcoin was released in 2009. I got onboard in mid-2010 and the price at that time was more like 100 BTC per pizza (Here, 1 pizza is around 5 euros). Correction: It was two pizzas, so 5000 per pizza at about $12.50 per pizza. The date was May 22, 2010. The genesis block was January 3, 2009. That is 17 months. The price subsequently increased rapidly in 2010, as recounted at the history page (linked below). The point being after 17 months it was still 10000 BTC = $25 i.e. 1 BTC = $0.0025 (and was 18% mined). That is a very long time by today's standards. Almost (but not quite) literally a premine in the sense that it was 18% mined before it was used for anything. Sources: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=137.msg1195#msg1195https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/History#2010 |
|
|
|
Yeah, perfect emission curve should track adoption, but this seems to be impossible in real world.
After all, even if bitcoin emission curve is not perfectly "fair", and not exactly track adoption, it is still more fair than faster emission models, isn't it?
For what it is, if Bitcoin's curve were faster, it would probably be worse. That is, Bitcoin being the first and not understood or recognized as valuable at all for quite a while. It took almost 2 years just to get to the 10,000 BTC = 1 pizza stage. By that time it was already about 20% mined which definitely seems kind of silly. Today, new coins obviously get at least some adoption a lot faster than Bitcoin did. I don't know if this means that faster-than-Bitcoin curves are better for new coins. Maybe they should all be a lot slower. XCN might be on to something with their 10-year half life. Or maybe something like Bitcoin's curve is just right for a coin like XMR or BBR. Or maybe Bitcoins curve is right for Bitcoin and new coins should be faster. Or maybe the idea of any fixed curve set in stone from the start is really not the best way to go at all. (But then if not, what should replace it?) There is a lot we don't know about how these coins work, or even if they can work at all long term. |
|
|
|
Why monero.cc website is offline.
Works for me. |
|
|
|
But synctime is just related to the algorithm right? Or are there Other delay-factors?
Not really, you have to also believe that the implementation is a good efficient implementation of the algorithm. It probably isn't. No concrete Plans how That Could be Speed up right now, are there?
Our immediate plans are to continue code reviews and identify and correct problems with the implementation. There are many. |
|
|
|
Does snycing always take so much Time? Anything considered to improve that in future?
It takes longer if you haven't used it for a while (if ever). Yes it will probably be improved in the future. Is the wallet Safe? Read post where People Lost coins??.. Is it true? Otherwise are you all keeping the coins online?
Regards
I'm not aware of anyone losing coins. There were some issues with people who didn't update their wallet using too low a transaction fee which made their transactions not confirm. They got their coins back by resyncing their wallet. Make sure you you securely back up your wallet keys file. |
|
|
|
They are getting the number of coins from monerchain which was down until recently and is said to be still rebuilding their database. So hopefully this will fix itself soon. |
|
|
|
Yesterday I watched the Fireside Chat, patiently waiting user-friendly GUI. Account term is more reasonable. You know Andreas Antonopoulos also don't like wallet term because it's confusing, he sees Bitcoin Core is like key-chain with all the private keys on it. I support "account", non-crypto environment can understand it better.
Right, wallet is pretty confusing for ordinary ppl, as they expect some physical form of it. On the other hand, account sounds more centralized. That's an education thing that we'll have to battle through - getting people to understand that there's no central money control or anything. However, I think the conversation is going to be a lot easier. "You just create a new account, which is completely secure and free, and you can create as many different accounts as you need for you, your wife, your business, whatever. And the great thing is that there's no government or company that controls your money, just like with Bitcoin, so you are in control of your money." vs. "You know how in Bitcoin you have a wallet, and in that wallet you have lots of addresses? Well it's like that, but your wallet only has one address. No no, it's not a physical wallet. No you can't keep your Starbucks loyalty card in it. Ah no, the iPhone app merely connects you to this decentralised network, but that's not the wallet, the wallet is a separate file that has your private key in it. No no, your private key is like a secret password that is in your wallet and that is used to generate your address. Now don't get frustrated with me, it's really quite simple, you generate a private key - I mean the client app generates a private key - and then that's stored in a wallet file that you can backup, and then your wallet has an address. You'll understand it in no time!" Comparing to bitcoin is only relevant in the very short term, when 100% of Monero users are coming from Bitcoin. Beyond that, the bigger picture is that 99% of the planet has no idea what a Bitcoin wallet is. Even if Monero remains well behind Bitcoin, if it is successful most new users will come from that 99%, with no particular reason to favor the Bitcoin terminology. |
|
|
|
I guess in global view, comapred to XMR we have more honest distribution, at least because we have more fair emission curve:
I'm not sure why one curve would be any more fair than the other. Does XCN have a more fair emission curve because it has a 10-year half life? Would 20-years be even better? To me "fair" means that the rules are clearly defined and those same rules apply to everyone. Different emissions curves might have practical advantages and disadvantages, but fairness is not among them. I agree about clearly defined rules, it's definately an indispensable part of fair distribution. But also i think that faster emission makes less interest for late joining the currency - in long term view, so i think Bitcoin emission curve is closer to be fair. Closer perhaps but it is still quite easy to argue that it is "unfair" if this is your definition of unfair. Bitcoin is about 75% mined and most people on the planet have no idea it even exists. Even most people in developed countries with good access to information and access to computers have barely heard of it if at all. Now I don't happen to think that is "unfair" as I said earlier, but if your definition of fairness includes wide access to large amounts of newly issued coins to late adopters the Bitcoin's curve is also grossly unfair. The thing is, you can't really know this in advance. When Bitcoin was created, nobody had any idea if it would ever be remotely successful or how long it would take. Likewise for newer cryptocurrencies. So if you are using the model of a fixed curve defined in advance and trying to make this curve track adoption (even in some loose sense )you almost can't help but miss the mark. And as you said, there are also practical advantages and disadvantages. But let this out of scope, say you launching new coin at this moment, what emission curve would you select for this ?
I don't know. There are all sorts of considerations, and I'm sure you have considered many of them. From a strategic point of view I might try something that is deliberately outside of the range already crowded with existing coins. I give the XCN guys credit for thinking a bit outside the box and trying that. |
|
|
|
~50% of all XMR that will ever be in existence will be minted near 1 year from now which limits large pool of xmr holders to confines of the specific monero thread(s), in a subsection of this forum, subreddits and a few guys who heard about it trollbox of obscure exchanges. (Technically it doesn't limit holders, just potential first holders, but I know what you are saying.) We don't know how people will find out about Monero a year from now. I suspect either Monero will have been viewed as a failure by then, or the ways people find out about it will be significantly broader than those you listed (which approximately describes the situation today, not a year from now). Even then, that that is still only 50%, leaving 50% unissued. Imagine if that same emission curve was even steeper, and instead 50% of the supply will be released in 1 month.. how about 1 week, or 1 hour..let's be even more retarded and say 1 minute. Half of all monero ever released in 1 minute; BUT the rules were clearly defined.. the [ann] thread was created explaining everything prior to the launch. (even though it may have done a half-assed attempt at a launch before subsequently picked up and saved/taken over/relaunched/rebranded months later..which incidentally is a great cover for a little headstart)
I don't think these would be very effective launches, nor a good idea, but if clearly described up front, I can't really call it unfair. Who is being mislead here? If you don't think issuing all the supply in the first month or first minute, then don't participate. But have you been treated unfairly? I don't think so. |
|
|
|
Coinmarketcap removed Monero?
Do a ctrl+f, it's there. #59 wtf  Screw up, if I ever saw one. Today their system registers only 6% of already mined XMR. Bad data from monerochain: http://monerochain.info/statsCoins in circulation (XMR) 187,863.189289889997
|
|
|
|
I guess in global view, comapred to XMR we have more honest distribution, at least because we have more fair emission curve:
I'm not sure why one curve would be any more fair than the other. Does XCN have a more fair emission curve because it has a 10-year half life? Would 20-years be even better? To me "fair" means that the rules are clearly defined and those same rules apply to everyone. Different emissions curves might have practical advantages and disadvantages, but fairness is not among them. |
|
|
|
Alain here from the Stanford Bitcoin Group.
Can you authenticate your identity? |
|
|
|
The turnover is far in excess of mining output.
Yes, this is quite interesting and different from many other alts. I don't really know why this happened but it seems a huge portion of the trading on this coin is speculative in nature and has nothing to do with mining and coins finding their first home. It is very unusual. Was bitcoin like that at the beginning? If so, please feel free to share some others similarities xmr shares with btc  It was in 2011 when I arrived but that was hardly the beginning. The very beginning of btc was a ver different situation though since exchanges didn't exist at all. The very first "trade" of any kind was probably the pizza. In 2011 we had MtGox and there was plenty of speculative trading. |
|
|
|
The turnover is far in excess of mining output.
Yes, this is quite interesting and different from many other alts. I don't really know why this happened but it seems a huge portion of the trading on this coin is speculative in nature and has nothing to do with mining and coins finding their first home. It is very unusual. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
